Full Judgment Text
REPORTABLE
2024 INSC 383
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2024
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5719/2023)
AMANATULLAH KHAN …APPELLANT
VERSUS
THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, DELHI
& ORS. …RESPONDENTS
JUDGEMENT
SURYA KANT, J.
1 . Leave granted.
2. The appellant approached the High Court of Delhi through
a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read
with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for
quashing of the ‘History Sheet’ opened against him and the
proposal to declare him as ‘Bad Character’ with the entry of his
name in the Surveillance ‘Register-X, Part II, Bundle A’ at Police
Station Jamia Nagar, District: South-East, Delhi. The Single
Judge of High Court has, vide the impugned judgment dated
19.01.2023, dismissed the appellant’s writ petition, giving rise to
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
Ashwani Kumar
Date: 2024.05.07
12:33:01 IST
Reason:
these proceedings.
Page 1 of 8
3. Upon notice, the Delhi Police entered appearance through
Mr. Sanjay Jain, learned senior counsel, who was apprised of
some disturbing contents of the History Sheet to the extent it
pertained to the school going minor children of the appellant and
his wife, against whom there was apparently no adverse material
whatsoever for inclusion in the History Sheet. It was then apprised
that the format of the history sheeters was prescribed following
Rule 23.8 and Rule 23.9 of the Punjab Police Rules 1934 (in short,
the “1934 Rules”) as were applicable in the NCT of Delhi. Mr. Jain,
learned senior counsel for the respondents, however, fairly agreed
to re-visit the archaic rules with a view to ensure that the dignity,
self-respect and privacy of the innocent people, who incidentally
happen to be the family members of a suspect, is not compromised
at any cost.
4 . Mr. Sanjay Jain, learned senior counsel has today placed
on record the amended Standing Order No.L&O/54/2022 issued
by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi. The aforesaid Standing
Order pertains to ‘Surveillance of History Sheeters and Bad
Characters’. It appears that the Original Standing order was
issued on 10.06.2022 and paragraph 9(2) thereof titled as
“Preparation of History Sheet” was replicated from provisions of
the 1934 Rules.
Page 2 of 8
5. With the amended Standing Order issued on 21.03.2024,
the Commissioner of Police has provided as follows:
“The space for “relation and connection” should be
filled in with a view to afford clues about those
persons with whom the criminal is likely to harbour
when wanted by the police, including relations or
friends living at a distance from his home, and his
associates in crime, abettors and receivers. It may be
noted that the space for “relations and connections”
in the history sheet should reflect identities of those
persons who can afforded him shelter when the
offender is running/wanted by the police (in general)
and should include his associates in crime, abettors
and receivers (in particular) and no details of any
minor relatives i.e. son, daughter, siblings should be
recorded anywhere in the History Sheet unless there
is evidence that the minor under question can, or
has earlier had, afforded shelter to the offender,
“while he was on run from police”.
While preparing History Sheet, it may also be kept in
mind that as per Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, there is
a prohibition on disclosing the Identity of a child in
conflict with law or a child in need of care and
protection of a child victim or witness of a crime
through a report etc. Even though the History Sheet
is an internal Police document and not a publicly
accessible report, care must be taken that identities
of only those minor relatives are entered into the
History Sheet against whom evidence exists that
minor in question has earlier had, afforded shelter to
the offender, while he was on run from police”. In
addition to above, the particular nature of each
person’s connection should be noted against each,
and, when persons shown as connections
themselves have history sheets, a cross reference
with those History Sheets should be given. Maximum
phone numbers/mobile numbers or
associates/relatives/acquaintances of BCs should
be collected and placed for record. Aadhar Number,
EPIC number, e-mail ID, social media
accounts/profiles viz, facebook, Instagram ID,
Twitter ID etc. to be placed on file. Further mobile
numbers & other available details of
associates/relatives/acquaintance of BC should be
collected and placed on record.”
Page 3 of 8
6. We find from the amended Standing Order that in the
column “relations and connections”, it has been decided that
identities of only those persons shall be reflected who can afford
the history sheeter/bad character shelter, when the offender is
running/wanted by the police and it shall also include names of
his associates in crime, abettors and receivers. The amended
Standing Order emphatically says that no details of any minor
relatives, i.e., son, daughter, siblings shall be recorded anywhere
in the History Sheet unless there is evidence that such minor, has
or earlier had, afforded shelter to the offender.
7. Secondly, the amended provision now mandates that
Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 shall be meticulously followed, whereunder
there is a prohibition on disclosing the identity of a child in conflict
with law or a child in need of care and protection or a child victim
or a witness of a crime through a report etc.
8. The amended Standing Order further clarifies that ‘History
Sheet’ is an internal police document and not a publicly accessible
report. It has cautioned the police officers that care must be taken
to ensure that identities of only those minor relatives are entered
in the History Sheet against whom evidence exists that such minor
had earlier afforded shelter to the offender, while he was on the
run from the police. The safeguard with regard to the details of
Page 4 of 8
phone numbers, Aadhar Card, EPIC number, e-mail I.D., social
media accounts etc., have also been suggested in the amended
Standing Order.
9. It seems that so far as the case in hand is concerned, the
decision taken by the respondents to the effect that the History
Sheet is only an internal police document and it shall not be
brought in public domain, largely addresses the concern
expressed by us in the beginning. Secondly, the extra care and
precaution, to be now observed by a police officer while ensuring
that the identity of a minor child is not disclosed as per the law
too, is a necessary step to redress the appellant’s grievances. It
will surely prevent the undesirable exposure that has been given
to the minor children in this case.
10. All that we propose to direct the police authorities is that
the amended Standing Order dated 21.03.2024 be given effect
forthwith in the appellant’s case also.
11. In addition, we also direct the Commissioner of Police,
Delhi to designate a senior police officer, in the rank of Joint
Commissioner of Police or above, who shall periodically
audit/review the contents of the History Sheets and will ensure
confidentiality and a leeway to delete the names of such
persons/juvenile/children who are, in the course of investigation,
Page 5 of 8
found innocent and are entitled to be expunged from the category
of “relations and connections” in a History Sheet.
12. It goes without saying that if a Police Officer of Delhi Police
is found to have acted contrary to the amended Standing Order
and or the directions given herein above, prompt action against
such delinquent officer shall be taken.
13. The impugned judgment of the High Court dated
19.01.2023 stands modified and the instant criminal appeal is
disposed of in the above terms.
14. Having partially addressed the grievance of the appellant,
we now, in exercise of our suo motu powers, propose to expand the
scope of these proceedings so that the police authorities in other
States and Union Territories may also consider the desirability of
ensuring that no mechanical entries in History Sheet are made of
innocent individuals, simply because they happen to hail from the
socially, economically and educationally disadvantaged
backgrounds, along with those belonging to Backward
Communities, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes. While we are
not sure about the degree of their authenticity, but there are some
studies available in the public domain that reveal a pattern of an
unfair, prejudicial and atrocious mindset. It is alleged that the
Police Diaries are maintained selectively of individuals belonging
Page 6 of 8
to Vimukta Jatis, based solely on caste-bias, a somewhat similar
manner as happened in colonial times. All the State Governments
are therefore expected to take necessary preventive measures to
safeguard such communities from being subjected to inexcusable
targeting or prejudicial treatment. We must bear in mind that
these pre-conceived notions often render them ‘invisible victims’
due to prevailing stereotypes associated with their communities,
which may often impede their right to live a life with self-respect.
15. The value for human dignity and life is deeply embedded in
Article 21 of our Constitution. The expression ‘life’ unequivocally
includes the right to live a life worthy of human honour and all
that goes along with it. Self-regard, social image and an honest
space for oneself in one’s surrounding society, are just as
significant to a dignified life as are adequate food, clothing and
shelter.
16. It seems that a periodic audit mechanism overseen by a
senior police officer, as directed for the NCT of Delhi, will serve as
a critical tool to review and scrutinize the entries made, so as to
ascertain that these are devoid of any biases or discriminatory
practices. Through the effective implementation of audits, we can
secure the elimination of such deprecated practices and kindle the
legitimate hope that the right to live with human dignity, as
guaranteed under Article 21, is well protected.
Page 7 of 8
17. We are conscious of the fact that States or Union
Territories, other than the NCT of Delhi, are not before us. They
have not been heard. No positive mandamus can thus be issued
to them. Further, we are not aware of the existing Rules/Policies
or Standing Orders in vogue in different States/Union Territories.
We, therefore, deem it appropriate, at this stage, to direct all the
States/Union Territories to revisit their policy-regime and
consider whether suitable amendments on the pattern of the
‘Delhi Model’ are required to be made so that our observations
made in paragraphs 14 to 16 of this order can be given effect in
true letter and spirit.
18. The Registry is, accordingly, directed to forward a copy of
this judgement to the Chief Secretary and Director General of
Police of all States and Union Territories to enable them to
consider and comply with what has been held above, as early as
possible but not later than six months.
19. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
……….....................J.
(SURYA KANT)
……….....................J.
(K.V. VISWANATHAN)
New Delhi;
May 7, 2024.
Page 8 of 8